Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 426 posts

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#61

Post by DanBC »

kaycebasques wrote: post #36

The HN response seems strongly negative so far. Can someone educated in the space play devil’s advocate and share ideas on why it might be a good move?

Vaping is much safer than smoking, so you should allow vaping while you restrict tobacco.

We don't know if vaping is safe. So, using the precautionary principle, you could ban it or restrict it for non-smokers until we get more data. Public Health deals with population sizes, not individuals. Imagine 100,000 non smokers take up vaping. Some of them will be harmed (because nothing is risk free). We need to have a discussion about how many people being harmed is an acceptable risk, and how we communicate that risk to users.

And there's some evidence that people who start vaping with nicotine-containing products will become addicted to nicotine and move to tobacco. That isn't helped by companies going out of their way to design a more addictive vaping product. This is another reason to restrict vaping products and only allow them to be used by people who smoke tobacco.

Personally, I disagree with the ban and I prefer Public Health England's stance. I think banning vaping while allowing internal combustion engine vehicles on the road is dumb. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-le...

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#62

Post by quickthrower2 »

pigscantfly wrote: post #7

This is perverse given that tobacco cigarettes are still widely available. I can't remember the last time I was actually satisfied with a decision from the Board of Supervisors.

How are they sold? In Australia they have the gory death warnings, are sold in cabinets with no logos (just a plain font list of brand names) and are ridiculously expensive $40 for 20. Cigars might be an exception(?)

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#64

Post by JamesBarney »

munk-a wrote: post #23
llamataboot wrote: post #15

All prohibition is asinine but this has to take the cake. Even if there is no way to prevent more kids from getting addicted to vaping (and that's a big if), having less kids and many less adults smoking cigarettes is such a huge win for public health. -- Anecdotally I went from 2 packs a day to chain vaping for a few years, health improved enough to start being much more active, finally weaned down nicotine, quittin…

I am happy that's worked out for you - and e-cigs are definitely less dangerous than conventional cigarettes, but the adoption rate of smoking among younger folks has spiked since flavoured e-cigs were introduced. I really want vapes to be available as an alternative to conventional smoking but the companies pushing them now are addicting a lot of new users, if the market participants were more responsible these devi…

There has been an increase in vaping, but the health benefits of vaping instead of smoking are so large that they swamp the ill health effects from increased vaping unless you get 20 new vapers for each person who quits smoking.

In this debate people really underestimate how bad smoking is for you.

UK NHS estimates e-cigarettes about 95% less damaging than smoking. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/vaping-quit-smokin...

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#65

Post by Simulacra »

mullingitover wrote: post #26

Let's work through the logic here: San Francisco assumes that the existing controls on the purchase of tobacco products by minors are a failure. They must act. San Francisco's reaction to this is to ban all tobacco products from the city, for the children. This is perfectly rational. But wait, no, their reaction is to ban the harm reduction option and keep the worst tobacco product known to be the most addictive and…

“...how on earth would big tobacco profit off of the loss of this young man. I would hate to think on such callous terms, but if anything, we would be losing a customer. It is not only our hope, but in our best interest to keep Robin alive and smoking.”

- thank you for smoking

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#66

Post by llamataboot »

hinkley wrote: post #42
llamataboot wrote: post #15

All prohibition is asinine but this has to take the cake. Even if there is no way to prevent more kids from getting addicted to vaping (and that's a big if), having less kids and many less adults smoking cigarettes is such a huge win for public health. -- Anecdotally I went from 2 packs a day to chain vaping for a few years, health improved enough to start being much more active, finally weaned down nicotine, quittin…

You don't sound like you're overdoing it, but get yourself screened for atrial fib. Family member finally quit smoking to ride more, went a little too gung-ho on endurance and developed an afib. He couldn't take blood thinners due to arthritis meds. Mixing those is apparently worse than your stroke risk. But he lost that lottery and threw a clot a few years ago and things were pretty bad.

Had a full work up. Lungs are "undistinguishable from a non smoker" in terms of capacity. Heart rhythm is normal and RHR has dropped from 90s as a smoking coder that sat a lot to the 60s as a non-smoking coder that moves a lot more (Thanks apple watch!). HRV has gone from 20s to 60s-70s in the past year. VO2 Max (at least from Apple Watch) has gone from about low 30s to low 40s in a year which puts me at good, but not yet super in shape for a 40 year old.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#68

Post by jonahhorowitz »

lovecg wrote: post #47
munk-a wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am happy that's worked out for you - and e-cigs are definitely less dangerous than conventional cigarettes, but the adoption rate of smoking among younger folks has spiked since flavoured e-cigs were introduced. I really want vapes to be available as an alternative to conventional smoking but the companies pushing them now are addicting a lot of new users, if the market participants were more responsible these devi…

I can easily see that being the case, but can you point to some references with these numbers?

From the Surgeon General:

> E-cigarette use among U.S. youth and young adults is now a major public health concern. E-cigarette use has increased considerably in recent years, growing an astounding 900% among high school students from 2011 to 2015. [0]

[0]: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/e-cigarettes...

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#69

Post by llamataboot »

slg wrote: post #55
llamataboot wrote: post #15

All prohibition is asinine but this has to take the cake. Even if there is no way to prevent more kids from getting addicted to vaping (and that's a big if), having less kids and many less adults smoking cigarettes is such a huge win for public health. -- Anecdotally I went from 2 packs a day to chain vaping for a few years, health improved enough to start being much more active, finally weaned down nicotine, quittin…

Would you support methadone being freely available over the counter? After all, it is a valuable tool in helping get people off more dangerous opioids.

I support and advocate for 100% across the board drug decriminalization, so prob not the best one to ask.
Post reply on HN